Thailand's Thaksin Prepares For War

[tlansford]

Rubl, #267

Lots of posters have

told me that the use of the Army for crowd control as done in Thailand March - May 2010

Using the coup-ist enforcers to attack those who threatened their power-grab, as in Thailand March-May 2010, and then characterizing the citizens they assaulted as anti-social types and anarchists for standing up to them, is quite unique to Thailand.

Later these anti-social types and anarchists became terrorists. Not sure why. I think because the coup-ists described those who opposed them that way.

As many posters are discovering from alternative sources other than the Opposition.

"Later these anti-social types and anarchists became terrorists. Not sure why"

Because that is an accurate way of describing those committing mass arson and setting car bombs. Later the TRC, as a milksop to the current regime, changed that to "criminal association" which doesn't change the fact that those actions were criminal.

Are you aware that your minimalist view of democracy would support Hitler, the elected leader of Germany in the 1930s who came to power by use of his private militia creating social division and oppressing opposition.

Again, an inaccurate and over the top comparison to Hitler. Not only is Thailand not Great Depression, Post-WW I Germany, your statements that he was elected the leader of Germany and implying that he somehow gained power through democratic processes is also incorrect.

Hitler was not elected chancellor, but appointed chancellor through non-democratic maneuvers, and his consolidation of power thereafter was completed in the same way.

People who understand Germany history know that he did not come to power through democratic means but by exploiting and inflaming the fear & hatred of people against, Jews, gays, gypsies, and others in a defeated country with an impossible economic situation, while simultaneously presenting the himself as the solution to Germany' plight, and then weaseled his way into being appointed chancellor.

After which he put through a law to give his cabinet emergency powers for 4 years, (physically excluding part of the legislature and using other strong-arm tactics & threats in order to get the needed margin) with which he abolished the office of President on Hindenberg's death and folded them into his own powers.

And long before he ever attempted all of this manipulation, his first failed power-grab attempt was much more direct : a coup.

There is no view of democracy, minimalist or otherwise, which "would support Hitler".

[tlansford]

And the current proposed rewrite is designed to do what?

- sniper -

"Later these anti-social types and anarchists became terrorists. Not sure why"

Because that is an accurate way of describing those committing mass arson and setting car bombs. Later the TRC, as a milksop to the current regime, changed that to "criminal association" which doesn't change the fact that those actions were criminal.

Are you aware that your minimalist view of democracy would support Hitler, the elected leader of Germany in the 1930s who came to power by use of his private militia creating social division and oppressing opposition.

Even Hitler knew he needed to get the military on his NAZI party side to take over Germany. It appears that the red shirts and black shirts also had ex members and active members of the military on their side as well. The rule of law means nothing without a police and military enforcer supporting that rule of law. Members of the military swear oaths to defend the country and its laws. Who else is going to stop war lord types with their own thug army from breaking the nations laws and terrorizing citizens? Had the military not sided with the NAZI, Hitler would not have been able to do anything. Same with Thanksin, if he ever gets enough of the RTA on his side, who will stop him and enforce the country's rule of law, instead of the rule of a dictator?

Another ridiculous argument this time instead of defending democracy it is the rule of law that needs to be defended. You can't get any more illegal than a military coup less than a month before scheduled elections and then rewriting the constitution afterwards to exonerate yourself.

At the moment it is to allow for the creation of a CDA.

[Reasonableman]

Without identifying the need or the objective? Don't be coy.

[Orac]

Without identifying the need or the objective? Don't be coy.

The aim would be to turn the clock back to before the coup and put Thailand back on the rocky road to democracy.

I would be happy if that also brings Thaksin back but extremely disappointed if he does not face justice for any/all of his perceived crimes in the past though unfortunately Thailands record of holding its leaders to account is abismal.

[Reasonableman]

And the parts of this constitution that need change are.... Because... Someone please fill in the blanks.

Without identifying the need or the objective? Don't be coy.

The aim would be to turn the clock back to before the coup and put Thailand back on the rocky road to democracy.

I would be happy if that also brings Thaksin back but extremely disappointed if he does not face justice for any/all of his perceived crimes in the past though unfortunately Thailands record of holding its leaders to account is abismal.

[tlansford]

Without identifying the need or the objective? Don't be coy.

The stated aim of this gov't is to roll-back the undemocratic changes imposed by the junta in the 2007 constitution. This has been addressed in different forms from different groups.

The current amendment is to allow for the creation of the CDA.

Your guess is as good as mine as to what will come out of the CDA, but everyone knows that this will finally depend on the make up of the CDA.

It would not surprise me if, in the end, it is not the changes to the charter that allow Thaksin to return to Thailand without going to jail or facing new criminal charges.

[Orac]

And the parts of this constitution that need change are.... Because... Someone please fill in the blanks.

Without identifying the need or the objective? Don't be coy.

The aim would be to turn the clock back to before the coup and put Thailand back on the rocky road to democracy.

I would be happy if that also brings Thaksin back but extremely disappointed if he does not face justice for any/all of his perceived crimes in the past though unfortunately Thailands record of holding its leaders to account is abismal.

It is argued Article 237 as the proposers what stronger penalties for indviduals who commit election fraud but removal of the ability to ban parties which can be manipulated for political reasons.

Also Article 309 is in question because it gives legitimacy and primacy to the interim constitution of 2006.

There may be other issues that come up during the drafting process or changes that are put before the public to vote on before any new constitution could be accepted.

Edited February 20, 2012 by Orac

[CalgaryII]

Would the new riots be a ploy to demand his return?

There are new riots? I seem to have missed that

There were never old riots.

There was the coup-ist attack on anti-coupists, resulting in some fightback, and the killing of over 90 taxpayers, but that is all.

Perhaps you are confusing the Oppositional mantra, trying to characterize the taxpayers who stood up to their coup, as being anarchist, anti-social and yes, rioters while portraying their armed aggressors malevolently.

But that is just the Opposition denigrating those who do not accept their undemocratic tendencies, like little ole' coups and such.

[CalgaryII]

The government planning a Control Centre to direct mass pro-government 'red-shirt' demonstrations.

History repeats itself. Germany 1930's, Communist countries. All with a need to show the world they are loved by population. Down with non-conformists, even the Gulag is too good for them. All in name of democracy of course. Let us be clear about that

Indeed Rubl and where is Germany now? A world leader? is Russia now evolving?.........so why can't Thailand be allowed to move forward, instead of being suffocated by people who apparently know a better way to fix the issues, but as yet their methodology and practical skills have failed the majority of the population

Let Thailand learn by their own success and mistakes............and remove the ridiculous repetitive act of re-setting a failed system

Government directed pro-government protests seem like a way to hide that their methodology and practical skills have failed the majority of the population.

Thailand has the right the learn from it's own successes and mistakes. Still if you can learn a bit from others, maybe lots of mistakes can be avoided.

Well as long as the pro government rallies only "seem like a way"........we can wait until the next election to judge their skills........not even one year in office and you are predicting the next election result will surely go to the Democrats?......no?.....then let the people judge this government following a full term of office.....with their votes

Bingo!

[CalgaryII]

Scorecard, #256

But because there's no perfect model doesn't mean that its' all OK for a dicator and his family to take over and supervise / sanction the execution of their own fellow citizens.

Careful throwing around the word 'dictator'. It may be misconstrued.

Lacking a perfect model of Democracy, does not sanction the use of coups to overthrow elected Govts., and then branding the citizens who not accept such a thing, as anarchists. Or arrogantly claiming they lack political motivation.

As if only coup-ists are blessed with a political context and motivation.

Arrogant to say the least, displaying their snobbish disrespect for a large swath of the Thai electorate.

BTW, if Posters can repeat inane charges such as this, I can be repetitive also. It is amazing how the Oppositional agenda can be repeated endlessly, yet when confronted equally, the confrontator is accused of repetitiveness.

One of the more blatant examples of this phenomena currently, is the repetitive idiocy of suggesting Constitutional reform is simplistically one-person focussed, by simplistic people devoid of political awareness. It is such arrogance and disrespect for the other side that separates people.

Is it any wonder one gets headlines such as this related to anti-coup diligence.

Doesn't compute.

Edited February 20, 2012 by CalgaryII

[AleG]

Would the new riots be a ploy to demand his return?

There are new riots? I seem to have missed that

There were never old riots.

There was the coup-ist attack on anti-coupists, resulting in some fightback, and the killing of over 90 taxpayers, but that is all.

Perhaps you are confusing the Oppositional mantra, trying to characterize the taxpayers who stood up to their coup, as being anarchist, anti-social and yes, rioters while portraying their armed aggressors malevolently.

But that is just the Opposition denigrating those who do not accept their undemocratic tendencies, like little ole' coups and such.

That's simply blatant, dishonest historical revisionism.

When you have to lie to advance your agenda, a honest person would look back at what its doing and recant in shame.

Not waiting for any recanting here.

[Mosha]

Tax payers lol, I bet 95% of the donkeys bussed into to Bangkok for the burn Bangkok fest never payed 1 baht in taxes.

[CalgaryII]

• 
  
  Scorecard, #258
  
  
• 
  
  Keep the membership vital, involved, informed and cohesive. Guess you mean keep them naive and drugged.
  
  

I won't bothered with the rest of your posturing.

There we go again. Repetitively denigrating a huge electoral block in the country as being devoid of political awareness.

Scorecard is merely the tip of the iceberg given this contemptuousness. .

If truth were known, most Oppositional elements have an extremely disdainful view of those Thai citizens not of their status. To the point of an inability to accept they have equal political rights and awareness.

It is such exaggerated self-opinion, that will keep them in the political wilderness in the foreseeable future. They are an electoral minority, with a leader whose aloofness cannot relate to those not of his station in life.

Until this group can bring itself to some degree of political inclusion, they will be spinning their political wheels forever.

They will always be suspiciously viewed as being coup-ists at heart due to their electoral disadvantage, resulting in the vigilance suggested by this thread's headline.

Edited February 20, 2012 by CalgaryII

[pedro01]

Tax payers lol, I bet 95% of the donkeys bussed into to Bangkok for the burn Bangkok fest never payed 1 baht in taxes.

I'd be interested to hear your thoughts on how they evade VAT...

[theanimaster]

Wait wait wait wait wait.... so Thaksin is preparing a war room and is going to lead a riot against the army.... the army responds by mowing down the redshirts... hey, doesn't that mean his SISTER, the current PM gets blamed?

I mean, the redshirts were blaming Abhisit for the way the army reacted when ~he~ was in power... shouldn't the blame then be on the current PM (Thaksin's sister) if the army goes and shoots a redshirt now? Or are we going to practice triple standards here?

What really makes me shudder -- does Mr. T. really CARE about his sister and the position he's putting her in???

AH well. All for big brother, I guess...

[whybother]

Would the new riots be a ploy to demand his return?

There are new riots? I seem to have missed that

There were never old riots.

There was the coup-ist attack on anti-coupists, resulting in some fightback, and the killing of over 90 taxpayers, but that is all.

Perhaps you are confusing the Oppositional mantra, trying to characterize the taxpayers who stood up to their coup, as being anarchist, anti-social and yes, rioters while portraying their armed aggressors malevolently.

But that is just the Opposition denigrating those who do not accept their undemocratic tendencies, like little ole' coups and such.

Utter tripe.

[theanimaster]

Wouldn't it be amazing to see what happened to Gloria Macapagal (the former Philippines president) happen to Thaksin? It's funny coz it's just one scumbag replacing the other. But apparently the scumbags here follow some strict rules (although it seems Thaksin is bending them... hence people are jealous/mad). The Philippines has "evolved" into a state where the next president isn't just content on being the next scumbag to ruin the country, but now they're making sure the bloodline of the former dictators die with them.

Imagine if Thailand were to become like that.

[Reasonableman]

Since almost everyone pays VAT, I guess that makes us all taxpayers. Converting thugs, thieves, rioters, murderers, arsonists, and stand-over merchants, into angelic do-gooder taxpayers is a pretty tall order, though. Good luck with that one.

[OzMick]

Tax payers lol, I bet 95% of the donkeys bussed into to Bangkok for the burn Bangkok fest never payed 1 baht in taxes.

I'd be interested to hear your thoughts on how they evade VAT...

How does anybody living in Thailand? Why is it then necessary to refer to the red shirt rabble as "taxpayers" when, if they are the poor ricefarmers they like to portray themselves as, they are in fact nett tax recipients?

[OzMick]

Rubl, #267

Lots of posters have

told me that the use of the Army for crowd control as done in Thailand March - May 2010

Using the coup-ist enforcers to attack those who threatened their power-grab, as in Thailand March-May 2010, and then characterizing the citizens they assaulted as anti-social types and anarchists for standing up to them, is quite unique to Thailand.

Later these anti-social types and anarchists became terrorists. Not sure why. I think because the coup-ists described those who opposed them that way.

As many posters are discovering from alternative sources other than the Opposition.

"Later these anti-social types and anarchists became terrorists. Not sure why"

Because that is an accurate way of describing those committing mass arson and setting car bombs. Later the TRC, as a milksop to the current regime, changed that to "criminal association" which doesn't change the fact that those actions were criminal.

Are you aware that your minimalist view of democracy would support Hitler, the elected leader of Germany in the 1930s who came to power by use of his private militia creating social division and oppressing opposition.

Again, an inaccurate and over the top comparison to Hitler. Not only is Thailand not Great Depression, Post-WW I Germany, your statements that he was elected the leader of Germany and implying that he somehow gained power through democratic processes is also incorrect.

Hitler was not elected chancellor, but appointed chancellor through non-democratic maneuvers, and his consolidation of power thereafter was completed in the same way.

People who understand Germany history know that he did not come to power through democratic means but by exploiting and inflaming the fear & hatred of people against, Jews, gays, gypsies, and others in a defeated country with an impossible economic situation, while simultaneously presenting the himself as the solution to Germany' plight, and then weaseled his way into being appointed chancellor.

After which he put through a law to give his cabinet emergency powers for 4 years, (physically excluding part of the legislature and using other strong-arm tactics & threats in order to get the needed margin) with which he abolished the office of President on Hindenberg's death and folded them into his own powers.

And long before he ever attempted all of this manipulation, his first failed power-grab attempt was much more direct : a coup.

There is no view of democracy, minimalist or otherwise, which "would support Hitler".

43.9% of the vote and forming a coalition is not democratic - but 48.3% and forming a coalition is? Inflaming fear and hatred of the upper classes/wealthy is not so different to doing the same to Jews, etc. Forming a private army is the first step, we are only part-way into the sequence, guess which bit comes next.

BTW Thaksin tried a coup; it failed but gave him propaganda ammunition to couple with electoral bribes to swing an election.

[CalgaryII]

Orac. #281

Not sure of the importance of the legality of Thaksins position at the time - there were quite a few constitutional issues that arose out of the failed election from earlier in the year. If the inference is that he was refusing to give up power and had to be ousted then that doesn't gel with the fact that a Royal Decree came into effect on 24th August setting an election date of 15th October

No matter how coup apologists try to torture historical realities into some sort of convoluted, follow-the-bouncing-ball logic, coups are difficult to defend withing an ostensible democratic system.

I say "ostensible' fully realizing it to be inaccurate to characterize Thai Democracy as democracy. But whatever it is, is better than armed coups and subsequent beat-downs of those who object.

Regardless how coup apologists twist historical facts, no scenario they dream up was devoid of an electoral solution, preventing the deaths of over 90 citizens, political upheaval and generating a hatred between Thai citizens depending on their political affiliation.

It pisses me off, that I am shepherded down the street to a different commercial establishment, to make whatever purchase I am considering, as the first establishment is of an incorrect political affiliation.

It pisses me off, when I had a Chang Beer put in front of me, because there is a boycott of Leo and Singha beer. Apparently the top dogs of those latter two companies have an overt anti-Nittirat campaign going.

But I go along, to get along. And it is no big deal to me.

But the anti-coup vigilance continues as this thread emphasizes.

Edited February 20, 2012 by CalgaryII

[Nisa]

Tax payers lol, I bet 95% of the donkeys bussed into to Bangkok for the burn Bangkok fest never payed 1 baht in taxes.

I'd be interested to hear your thoughts on how they evade VAT...

I don't know about VAT but I do know (edit: at least I have read) rice farmers are exempt from most taxes when it comes to anything related to their farming.

Edited February 20, 2012 by Nisa

[CalgaryII]

Would the new riots be a ploy to demand his return?

There are new riots? I seem to have missed that

From the OP ["red-shirt" demonstrations planned for the coming months]

As long as the coup-ist armed aggressors don't mess with them, there will be no riots.

[CalgaryII]

I wouldn't put much weight on the "facts" on that article, but a large Red Shirt mass rally would be the perfect (coincidentally of course!) time for Thaksin to simply drop by at Suvharnabumi. There would be a conveniently large group of fanatics at hand to stand behind him and justice. Justice of course highly unlikely to come from the government as I don't think they'll lift a finger to enforce court rulings against their boss; so that would leave the army to have a go at apprehending Thaksin. There a Ready-Made mob comes very handy, specially if they just happen to be heavily armed, again.

I doubt very much if Thaksin is brave enough to put himself any where near harm, better to do it all from a long way away

Oppositionally indoctrinated Thaksin haters are alive and well.

[whybother]

As long as the coup-ist armed aggressors don't mess with them, there will be no riots.

Unlike 2010.

[Orac]

As long as the coup-ist armed aggressors don't mess with them, there will be no riots.

Unlike 2010.

Unlike 2010 I doubt this government is going to hand over control of the situation to the army and authorise them to use live fire on them - if they do then I would say riots are a possibility.

[CalgaryII]

Ozmick, #296

"Later these anti-social types and anarchists became terrorists. Not sure why"

Because that is an accurate way of describing those committing mass arson and setting car bombs. Later the TRC, as a milksop to the current regime, changed that to "criminal association" which doesn't change the fact that those actions were criminal

The above quote a perfect example of the Oppositional agenda attempting to achieve several things:

• Maleveolently positioning their armed aggressors
  
• Denigrating those who opposed their aggression - Look at that molotov cocktail thrower, throwing it at the gunman....Poor gunman!
  
• Implying honorable intentions slapping down people opposed to them.
  
• Characterizing protesters as being devoid of a political context...merely as anarchists.
  
• trying to deep-six the fact the armed aggressors represented the electoral minority, whereas those who opposed them where the electoral majority as last years election clearly demonstrated.....and that electoral majority knew they were the majority.
  
• Magnifying physical damage to property, while ignoring the deaths of over 90 citizens ------ dead people vs. a damaged buildings. Don't those idiots know buildings are expensive.
  

And then some people wonder why there is such vigilance against future coups as this thread is headlined.

Edited February 20, 2012 by CalgaryII

[whybother]

As long as the coup-ist armed aggressors don't mess with them, there will be no riots.

Unlike 2010.

Unlike 2010 I doubt this government is going to hand over control of the situation to the army and authorise them to use live fire on them - if they do then I would say riots are a possibility.

Well, Calgary said that they weren't riots in 2010, so I don't why he would think there would be riots if "the coup-ist armed aggressors mess with them".

[CalgaryII]

Would the new riots be a ploy to demand his return?

There are new riots? I seem to have missed that

There were never old riots.

There was the coup-ist attack on anti-coupists, resulting in some fightback, and the killing of over 90 taxpayers, but that is all.

Perhaps you are confusing the Oppositional mantra, trying to characterize the taxpayers who stood up to their coup, as being anarchist, anti-social and yes, rioters while portraying their armed aggressors malevolently.

But that is just the Opposition denigrating those who do not accept their undemocratic tendencies, like little ole' coups and such.

That's simply blatant, dishonest historical revisionism.

When you have to lie to advance your agenda, a honest person would look back at what its doing and recant in shame.

Not waiting for any recanting here.

Characterizing the fightback to armed aggression as a 'riot', is pure political agenda, designed to denigrate those who opposed the coup-ist armed aggressors. Suggesting they were people devoid of a political context, bent on anti-social behavior, while casting the vengeful and vicious attack on them as justified.

If the fightback was a 'riot', what was the initiating armed aggression?

And then you wonder why there is anti-coup vigilance as thius thread discusses.

Edited February 20, 2012 by CalgaryII

[AleG]

Characterizing the fightback to armed aggression as a 'riot', is pure political agenda, designed to denigrate those who opposed the coup-ist armed aggressors. Suggesting they were people devoid of a political context, bent on anti-social behavior, while casting the vengeful and vicious attack on them as justified.

If the fightback was a 'riot', what was the initiating armed aggression?

And then you wonder why there is anti-coup vigilance as thius thread discusses.

Cut and paste talking points and catch phrases. Do yourself a favour, think for yourself and wake up already. You are nothing else than a Useful Idiot to Thaksin's PR machine.